Season over

[gaz5]

Yes but one man's view of what's fair won't be the same as the next man under the circumstances which exist. Someone has to make decisions and the EoS is putting forward a proposal which can either be accepted or rejected. What's unfair about that. Your view may win the day?

I'm well aware, but that doesn't prohibit me advocating the view I hold in the hope people just come to that conclusion themselves.

Nothing wrong with expressing an opinion which might make someone else go "hadn't thought of that".

Would be a pretty boring forum if that was the approach. [emoji1787]

[Dev]

2 minutes ago, gaz5 said:

I'm well aware, but that doesn't prohibit me advocating the view I hold in the hope people just come to that conclusion themselves.

Nothing wrong with expressing an opinion which might make someone else go "hadn't thought of that".

Would be a pretty boring forum if that was the approach.

Exactly.

[newcastle broon]

All this whinging about the leagues,whilst fantastic news coming from Craigroyston that they will still be competing next season how many clubs are in a position to say they will be financially secure to even last next season? 

This virus has been a total b*****d to everybody and might even destroy some clubs who were struggling as it is. 

This is a worry that goes through the whole of Scottish fitba no just the EoS leagues. 

[magoo]

4 hours ago, drs said:

What an utter shit show, that interconference idea was always daft but now deciding on who gets promoted via points gained against teams in another league is laughable.

Its a complete slap in the face for Leith and Kinnoull, especially when Premier League dross isn't being relegated - next season is going to have a shorter window to fit games into so it makes perfect sense for the Premier clubs to have to fit in at least 2 more games.

Laughable. 

Just goes to show that Scottish football is corrupt from the top to the bottom.

 

Could promote 6 teams then yeh

[Ormi]

25 minutes ago, newcastle broon said:

All this whinging about the leagues,whilst fantastic news coming from Craigroyston that they will still be competing next season how many clubs are in a position to say they will be financially secure to even last next season? 

This virus has been a total b*****d to everybody and might even destroy some clubs who were struggling as it is. 

This is a worry that goes through the whole of Scottish fitba no just the EoS leagues. 

If anything I believe clubs at EoS level will fair better than some further up the SPFL pyramid. For EoS clubs a big chunk of their budget is wages - and we’ve seen many clubs have players decline wages throughout this. However clubs further up the pyramid will also have additional full-time staff to pay whilst receiving no income which is not a problem down at our level.

[Che Dail]

3 hours ago, gaz5 said:

Maybe, but to be fair I'm not arguing for Dunipace (though obviously have a vested interest) I'm arguing for fairness.

I'd rather see Tynecastle go up alone to a restructured Premier, because they have earned it and were clearly going to achieve it, and ignore PPG altogether, for Promotion and Relegation.

It's shite for us and the other 5 teams in the hunt, but it treats us all (and those in the relegation spots) evenly, rewarding the only team who has truly "earned" anything so far this season, Tynecastle.

My issue isn't we won't go up, it's that PPG in a conference setup, where clubs have all played different fixtures, clubs will all play different fixtures and not everyone has even played everyone they have to once yet is inherently unfair. Teams will benefit based on luck (of fixturing, of games off, of when the shutdown happened) not on achievement.

I'm not an advocate of null and void, because that would only punish the one team who have achieved anything for sure this season: Tynecastle.

Is there an opportunity now to have another look at the structure for next season?   18 Premier / 16 First / 16 Second 

On basic sporting principles and fairness Bo'ness should get promoted, so it actually would be 17/16/16.

This way, no clubs are relegated from the Premier (rightly or wrongly). 

Tynecastle are promoted as clear 'B' winners, with LTHV winning 'A' on PPG.  

The top placed Conference clubs are at the very least rewarded with a 'promotion' of sorts, avoiding another season of Conferences... and the new clubs come in to a new division - the Fife neebors kept together.

Plenty promotion (green) relegation (red) and play-off (orange) opportunities.  Competitive leagues with lots to play for.

Any thoughts?

[GordonS]

15 minutes ago, Che Dail said:

Is there an opportunity now to have another look at the structure for next season?   18 Premier / 16 First / 16 Second 

On basic sporting principles and fairness Bo'ness should get promoted, so it actually would be 17/16/16.

This way, no clubs are relegated from the Premier (rightly or wrongly). 

Tynecastle are promoted as clear 'B' winners, with LTHV winning 'A' on PPG.  

The top placed Conference clubs are at the very least rewarded with a 'promotion' of sorts, avoiding another season of Conferences... and the new clubs come in to a new division - the Fife neebors kept together.

Plenty promotion (green) relegation (red) and play-off (orange) opportunities.  Competitive leagues with lots to play for.

Any thoughts?

The new clubs were told they were joining tier 7, so I don't know if that would be reasonable. 

[Black & Red Socks]

Is there an opportunity now to have another look at the structure for next season?   18 Premier / 16 First / 16 Second 
...
......
Plenty promotion (green) relegation (red) and play-off (orange) opportunities.  Competitive leagues with lots to play for.
Any thoughts?

I think this would be an excellent way to approach next season. With the amount of teams in the top division, a cup or two may have to go by the wayside if the season is shortened by a late start but there is lots of mileage in the suggestion.

One problem might be that the teams joining from Fife could have issues with coming in at Tier 8 and not at Tier 7 as they will have originally thought.

However, I suspect the proposal by the board will be comfortably carried when the votes are tallied next week and I’d have no real issues with that, although I can see why the Dunipace posters are kicking up a stink. Not everyone can or will be happy and the board deserve credit for doing their best to come up with a workable solution that, for me, punishes no one (I just don’t see the denial of a chance of promotion as a punishment).

[Footballfirst]

My personal view is that the Board has got their recommendation as near to a fair solution as was possible in the current circumstances.

The aim will have been to avoid punishing any individual club unfairly.

By "punishing", I mean, putting into effect a relegation that was previously just a risk of relegation.

At the top end of the tables, I don't have an issue in designating champion clubs on a PPG basis, allowing the nominated clubs to be considered for promotion

For the chasing clubs, they have lost out on a "potential" title winning or promotion promotion place.  I don't see that as a "punishment" per se, more like the loss of an opportunity.  I don't consider it as bad as losing your current status in the League

I think the proposals, as a package, represents the best and fairest result that could be achieved for all clubs in the circumstances that the League finds itself.  Some clubs will have gained a little, while others have lost a little, but no-one has been "punished" unfairly. 

Edited April 17, 2020 by Footballfirst

[Che Dail]

22 minutes ago, GordonS said:

The new clubs were told they were joining tier 7, so I don't know if that would be reasonable. 

I get that but the decision hinged on one or two votes - a fairly narrow margin anyway.  

From what I can gather the majority of Fife clubs would have moved to EoS regardless of which tier they were in.  In fact didn't some make announcements to that effect before the decision was made to run with conferences again?  

I got the impression the door was being kept open for the West Lothian clubs...  but they all turned down the opportunity to join at Tier 7. 

[monkeyblair]

Hi folks, I’m back.

[billybones]

27 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

My personal view is that the Board has got their recommendation as near to a fair solution as was possible in the current circumstances.

The aim will have been to avoid punishing any individual club unfairly.

By "punishing", I mean, putting into effect a relegation that was previously just a risk of relegation.

At the top end of the tables, I don't have an issue in designating champion clubs on a PPG basis, allowing the nominated clubs to be considered for promotion

For the chasing clubs, they have lost out on a "potential" title winning or promotion promotion place.  I don't see that as a "punishment" per se, more like the loss of an opportunity.  I don't consider it as bad as losing your current status in the League

I think the proposals, as a package, represents the best and fairest result that could be achieved for all clubs in the circumstances that the League finds itself.  Some clubs will have gained a little, while others have lost a little, but no-one has been "punished" unfairly. 

I think this is the most measured and pragmatic post I have read on the subject. Well said sir.

[boheesian]

26 minutes ago, monkeyblair said:

Hi folks, I’m back.

Oh no! !! Johnny come lately a sniff of success and yer back. Welcome back Monkey.

[sniffer]

I think this is the most measured and pragmatic post I have read on the subject. Well said sir.

Agreed

[Che Dail]

1 hour ago, Footballfirst said:

My personal view is that the Board has got their recommendation as near to a fair solution as was possible in the current circumstances.

The aim will have been to avoid punishing any individual club unfairly.

By "punishing", I mean, putting into effect a relegation that was previously just a risk of relegation.

At the top end of the tables, I don't have an issue in designating champion clubs on a PPG basis, allowing the nominated clubs to be considered for promotion

For the chasing clubs, they have lost out on a "potential" title winning or promotion promotion place.  I don't see that as a "punishment" per se, more like the loss of an opportunity.  I don't consider it as bad as losing your current status in the League

I think the proposals, as a package, represents the best and fairest result that could be achieved for all clubs in the circumstances that the League finds itself.  Some clubs will have gained a little, while others have lost a little, but no-one has been "punished" unfairly. 

I just think the approach is a bit negative.

Football should be about incentives and rewards - You start the season wanting to finish as high up the league as possible, and hope that it is recognised and results in a positive outcome. 

Nobody sets out hoping not to be punished.

There's now an opportunity to reverse a poor decision and reward the highest placed clubs who thought they'd be playing for a place in a 1st division and not another season of conferences.

Otherwise the bottom placed clubs get exactly the same reward as those finishing 2nd, 3rd and 4th: nothing.

[Guest]

My personal view is that the Board has got their recommendation as near to a fair solution as was possible in the current circumstances.
The aim will have been to avoid punishing any individual club unfairly.
By "punishing", I mean, putting into effect a relegation that was previously just a risk of relegation.
At the top end of the tables, I don't have an issue in designating champion clubs on a PPG basis, allowing the nominated clubs to be considered for promotion
For the chasing clubs, they have lost out on a "potential" title winning or promotion promotion place.  I don't see that as a "punishment" per se, more like the loss of an opportunity.  I don't consider it as bad as losing your current status in the League
I think the proposals, as a package, represents the best and fairest result that could be achieved for all clubs in the circumstances that the League finds itself.  Some clubs will have gained a little, while others have lost a little, but no-one has been "punished" unfairly. 

I do get what you are trying to get across, I really do, and if I were removed from the outcome I may very well feel the same.

However thats easy to say when you are not the club who misses out on promotion by 0.25 of a point. Not 1 point or three but 0.25. That's hard to accept as fair over a season, with the hard work that's went into it.

Tynecastle pld 23 ppg 2.82

Lthv 2.25 pld 24 ppg 2.25
Inverkeithing pld 20 ppg 2.25
Leith pld 25 ppg 2.12
Kinnoul pld 17 ppg 2.06
Dunipace pld 24 ppg 2.0
Glenrothes pld 21 ppg 1.93

Tynecastle were never going to be caught and are most definitely right to be promoted.

The others are separated by 0.32 of a ppg. That's a couple of results the right way with roughly 10 games to play for everyone. With some clubs still with each other to play.

Its a sore one.

[Marten]

There is no solution that doesn't disadvantage anyone, it's as simple as that. It's simply not true that promoting 7 clubs would not disadvantage anyone. Clubs who have done well this season and stayed out of the relegation places like Jeanfield Swifts & Crossgates Primrose would be disadvantaged by that. Instead of having to stay out of 3 relegation places in a 16 team division or 5 in an 18 team division, they'd suddenly have to stay out of 10 relegation places in a 23 team division (or 9/22 if Bo'ness get promoted), which will be a lot harder.

No relegation is absolutely fair enough. Promoting on PPG is not ideal but seems reasonable in the circumstances.

[sniffer]

I just think the approach is a bit negative.
Football should be about incentives and rewards - You start the season wanting to finish as high up the league as possible, and hope that it is recognised and results in a positive outcome. 
Nobody sets out hoping not to be punished.
There's now an opportunity to reverse a poor decision and reward the highest placed clubs who thought they'd be playing for a place in a 1st division and not another season of conferences.
Otherwise the bottom placed clubs get exactly the same reward as those finishing 2nd, 3rd and 4th: nothing.

Your being negative just now by moaning about what has been decided, the management committee have a job to do whether you think it’s right or wrong, just accept it and move on.
Now we can think of the positives for next season if there is one.

[Che Dail]

4 hours ago, sniffer said:

Your being negative just now by moaning about what has been decided, the management committee have a job to do whether you think it’s right or wrong, just accept it and move on.
Now we can think of the positives for next season if there is one.

I do think it is wrong.

It is a decision which, in hindsight, appears to serve aspiring appliant members before existing ones, along with others filling the bottom places in the 2nd year of conferences.

[buloyal]

I think if no promotion happens in the lowland/Eos leagues it’s a total mockery of the pyramid system, 

teams entered into this and have to get licences to be part of the SFA to get into lowland so why should the whole system be promotions in the top leagues and not in the lower leagues. 
surely there must be a same across the board situation or surely the pyramid system and SFA Licence system is flawed and unworkable. 
mad for the lowland league and EOS leagues not being together on this again is totally puzzling, isn’t there member of each organisation on each other’s boards ?? 

it’s like having 6 children and only giving Xmas presents to 4 of them !